Gachagua files seven-prayer petition challenging impeachment

Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua has taken a fresh legal route in his fight against impeachment, asking the court to overturn the process and issue several declarations on how Parliament handled his removal from office.

In documents submitted on Thursday, May 7, Gachagua maintains that both the National Assembly of Kenya and the Senate of Kenya did not comply with constitutional requirements when dealing with the impeachment motion against him. He argues that the procedure used was rushed and did not allow for fair civic input or proper observance of legal timelines.

Through his legal team, Gachagua is now seeking seven specific court orders. He wants the court to declare that the public participation carried out during the impeachment process was not adequate and did not meet the required legal standard for such proceedings. He also argues that the Senate failed to properly consider public views before making its final decision.

He further contends that the timelines used by Parliament were too short and did not allow sufficient time for proper debate and review of the allegations against him. According to him, this affected the fairness of the entire process.

Another key issue he raises is that the Senate was supposed to form a select committee to handle the impeachment matter, which he claims was a mandatory step that was not properly followed. He is also seeking a declaration that the entire process used by Parliament did not comply with constitutional requirements.

Beyond the declarations, Gachagua is asking the court to cancel the resolution passed by the National Assembly on October 8, 2024, which endorsed the impeachment motion. He also wants the Senate decision of October 17, 2024, which confirmed his removal from office, to be nullified.

This case comes after he revised his court filings, dropping his earlier push to be reinstated as Deputy President and instead focusing on compensation and legal interpretation of how the impeachment was conducted.

In the updated petition, he is seeking payment of salary, benefits, and allowances he says he would have earned had he completed his term in office. He insists that the impeachment process was unconstitutional and should not stand.

When the matter came up at the Milimani Law Courts on Monday, April 27, Senior Counsel Paul Muite, who represents him, confirmed the change in strategy and explained the new direction of the case.

"The petitioner has abandoned the prayer for reinstatement as Deputy President. The core of those prayers can be summarised as the quashing of the impeachment and payment of the remuneration and benefits he would have otherwise earned as provided by law," he said.

Muite also told the court that constitutional provisions were not properly applied, especially in relation to the period Gachagua had served before the impeachment process was initiated.

"For the 2.5 years that Gachagua served as the second Deputy President, it is our submission that Article 151 of the Constitution fully applies. Impeachment cannot and should not be applied retrospectively," he added.

The dispute now shifts to whether Parliament followed due process in handling the impeachment and whether the actions taken can withstand constitutional scrutiny.